The last rant on sharpness got me thinking about evaluating photography in a broader sense.Ever notice that discussions of photography between photographers revolve around technology far more than around imagery?
I had some thoughts on why this is:
1) Photography is an inherently technical medium
2) Photography is dominated by guys
3) Photography attracts geeks
4) Photography is a low-brow art form i.e. it is so easily accessible that anyone can do it and therefore it is done (no offense, hey, I’m a photographer!)
5) It is easier and safer to talk about gear than soft and fuzzy things like art and feelings.
6) It is easy to get flamed expressing soft and fuzzy opinions.
7) Talking about art is kind of “girly.” (see point 2)
Therefore it’s easier to talk about how to achieve silky grey tone transition rather than talking about images that have silky grey tone transition, or god forbid, images in which silky greytone transition is an essential element of the composition and essence of the image.
How can we get over this and talk about the things that are important to making our images work better formally rather than just technically.
It occurs to me that all of the list members on the “Digital B&W The Print” yahoo group should hold a juried exhibit of their 21-step grey scale wedges with reflective density measurements and LAB values carefully notated. The exhibit would be judged by the ability to achieve a numerically ideal tone progression within the broadest range of densities. Above each wedge (and the blue ribbons), we could display an image by each artist that they consider the pinnacle of their artistry. These entries would be judged on purely artistic criteria. Is there a correlation between technical mastery and artistry?
I'll say it again, technical competence is not the goal. It is merely a milepost on the way to a greater challenge: the ability to make meaningful images. The surprise: images do not need to be technically perfect to be artistically significant, or every artistically great.
Let’s try to talk about images rather than image making.
Disclaimer: I fully realize the hypocritical nature of the above comments. I am a male, I have been described as a geek, and I have a relatively low-brow level of art appreciation (I have a Masters in Design for God’s sake!) and I really like the technology. This rant is just a part of my 12 step program to come to terms with my own issues and get over the things that are holding me back from being a better artist.
2 comments:
I think you nailed it on that rant!
Nice shots by the way! I also assume you are the catalyst behinds Clays switch to RAW?
Anyway look forward to reading your site and hopefully learning something about art appreciation! :)
Yeah, I'm the nudge in Chicago.
The nudge was a compliment and a challenge to raise the bar on his work which is visually stunning.
It is far better to make art than to talk about art.
And it is worse yet to talk about making art.
james
Post a Comment